Abstract
Abstract. Most disequilibrium and shortage models of centrally planned economies fall into three categories: testable excess demand (the Portes school), disequilibrium indicators, and Kornai's economics of shortage. These models have generated numerous controversies and conflicting empirical results. However, this paper argues that some disputes are not caused by the theoretical features of the models but rather by the utilisation of different estimation methods that are not directly comparable. This suggests that several controversies are more apparent than real and can be resolved through the improvement of computational techniques and statistical hypothesis testing theory.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
